Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

All data were independently extracted by two investigators, and any discrepancies between the reviewers were resolved by the intercessor (JL) until consensus was reached. Data retrieved from the publications included author name, year of publication, number of patients, average age, gender, details about dosage and course of treatment, and outcome data. When necessary and feasible, the corresponding authors of the selected studies were contacted to obtain missing or incomplete data.

In terms of bias, the articles were evaluated as low risk, high risk, and unclear risk according to the following quality items: randomization generation, allocation concealment, subject blinding, outcome assessment, incomplete outcome data, and selective outcome reporting.